Florida Legislature OKs $27M in claims bill payments
Rep. Fiona McFarland says she'll file another sovereign immunity bill for the 2026 session. (Photo via the Florida House)
Lawmakers during this past session refused to make changes to the state's heavily criticized and often politicized claims bill process, but at the same time signed off on $27 million worth of payments in lawsuits that had been filed against local governments.
A Florida Phoenix review of the 2025 session shows the Legislature passed nine claims bills totaling $26,938,364 in liability that will be passed on to local governments or entities acting on their behalf.
The City of Gainesville is responsible for the largest claims bill (HB 6251), which will allow the payment of $10.8 million against the city for the negligence of a utility employee who ran a stop sign on his way home from work. The accident left Jacob Rodgers paralyzed from the waist down.
The bill analysis shows that of the total claim, $2.6 million-plus will go to his attorneys and another $137,500 will be paid to lobbyists who, according to the lobbyist disclosure system, are Matthew Forrest and Adrian Lukas with the firm Ballard Partners.
Conversely, the smallest claim bill passed during the 2025 session (SB 22) was for $200,000 and involved Joe Dimaggio Children's Hospital and the death of a seven-year-old-child, referred to in the record as E.E.M. The hospital, part of the South Broward Hospital District, did not oppose the claims bill, filed on behalf of Eric Miles Jr. and Jennifer Miles, E.E.M's parents.
Claims bills are required because Florida enjoys sovereign immunity for state and local governments as a legal sovereign from civil lawsuits filed in state court. The state does, however, allow negligence claims against itself and its subdivisions — agencies, cities, counties, and public hospitals — within limits.
Set in statute, those limits are $200,000 per person and $$300,000 per occurrence.
Injured parties can sue for damages and collect within those limits. But jury awards beyond those limits cannot be collected without the Legislature first approving a claims bill.
The claims bill process is lengthy and allows the defendant to challenge a jury verdict — two reasons why, Rep. Fiona McFarland says, she has twice filed legislation to change the law.
Her latest effort, HB 301, was one of the most heavily lobbied bills in Tallahassee this session, drawing 214 lobbyist registrations. The original bill would have increased the caps to $1 million per person and $3 million per occurrence. She later agreed to tag on an amendment that increased the caps to $500,000 per person and $1 million per incident for claims accruing on or after Oct. 1 and $600,000 per person and $1.1 million per occurrence for claims that accrue on or after Oct. 1, 2030.
While the amended bill passed the House by comfortable margins it never was considered by the Senate.
'I'm very disappointed,' McFarland told the Florida Phoenix as the session drew to an end.
She promised she'd sponsor the bill during the 2026 session.
While McFarland pushed the bill to change what she called an arbitrary process, a bid to raise the limits was opposed by local governments and public hospitals.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
House won't override DeSantis' ‘free kill' repeal veto
A trio of flashing billboards less than two miles from the Florida Capitol is slamming Gov. Ron DeSantis for vetoing the "free kill" bill on medical malpractice. (Photo credit: Christine Sexton/Florida Phoenix) House Speaker Daniel Perez said Thursday the chamber will try again next year to pass a repeal of the 'free kill' statute following Gov. Ron DeSantis' veto of the proposal. DeSantis on May 29 vetoed the Legislature's attempt to remove the bar on parents of adult children and the adult children of single parents from suing hospitals and physicians for non-economic damages for the deaths of loved ones. The governor said repealing 'free kill' would increase health care costs for Floridians and make it harder to keep physicians in the state. 'Of course, the governor has in his right the power to veto this bill, and he chose to do so,' Perez told reporters. 'I disagree with the veto, and we will be bringing that bill back next year for a continued conversation.' Lawmakers passed HB 6017 with bipartisan support. Repealing the ban on suits to recover non-economic damages is one of the perennial arguments in Tallahassee, as business interests and medical groups oppose the move. Perez said he remains opposed to placing caps on the pain-and-suffering damages, which is something that DeSantis said could make him support the repeal in the future, along with caps on attorneys' fees. The family members barred from suing for pain-and-suffering damages can recover economic damages, such as lost wages, medical bills, and funeral costs. 'I don't think that we should determine how much a person's life is worth when someone negligently ended it,' Perez said. The Senate also rejected a bid to cap the damages at $1 million on April 30. Florida, for now, remains the only state banning the recovery of pain-and-suffering damages for parents of adult children and adult children of single parents. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Maine Republicans, gun rights groups try to force hearing on 'red flag' proposal
Jun. 5—AUGUSTA — Republicans and gun rights groups are ramping up pressure on Democrats to hold a public hearing on a so-called red flag proposal that's headed for a statewide vote in November. Republican lawmakers are accusing the majority of violating state law by refusing to hold the hearing because it will undermine their campaign to pass the law. If approved by voters, the citizens initiative would make it easier for family members to have firearms temporarily taken away from people who are in crisis and may pose a danger to themselves or others. Sen. Trey Stewart, R-Presque Isle, said at a press conference Thursday that if Democrats don't reverse course and hold a hearing, Republicans will try to force the issue through a series of floor votes. And the National Rifle Association said Thursday that it will join a planned lawsuit over legislative Democrats' refusal to hold a public hearing. Stewart said Senate Republicans plan to offer a flurry of proposals to put Democrats on the record as opposing a chance for the public to weigh in. "It doesn't matter how you break this one down," Stewart said. "There needs to be a hearing. It's abundantly clear they're in violation of Maine law. Once again, (we're) giving them an opportunity to do the right things here. But if by today that is not the case (and) that has not yet happened, you're going to see a flurry of orders put forward by Republicans in the Senate." Democrats, who control both chambers and control committees that conduct public hearings, say they don't need to hold a hearing because the question will be decided by voters. Gun safety groups collected signatures to force a fall referendum on the red flag law, which would allow family members to directly petition a court to temporarily confiscate firearms. Maine currently has what is known as a yellow flag law, which was negotiated by Gov. Janet Mills, gun rights groups and gun safety groups. It can only be initiated by police and requires a mental health evaluation before a court petition can be filed to confiscate a person's firearms. A state law requires that a public hearing be held on statewide referendum questions, unless that hearing is waived by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. And hearings have been routinely held for other referendum questions, including a recent hearing on a referendum to enact a voter ID requirement and additional restrictions on absentee voting. Lawmakers have three options when receiving a qualified citizens initiative: Enact it without changes, send it to voters, or send it to voters with a competing measure. Democrats have made clear this initiative will be sent to voters without an effort to pass it in the Legislature. Sen. Anne Carney, D-Cape Elizabeth, who co-chairs the Judiciary Committee, said she believes a state law requiring a hearing conflicts with the state Constitution, which doesn't mention the need for a public hearing. And since lawmakers have signaled they don't plan to enact the proposal, a hearing isn't necessary. Carney also noted last week that a hearing on a similar red flag proposal was held last session. But opponents of the referendum are clamoring for a hearing. The Sportsmen's Alliance of Maine issued an action alert this week, arguing that Democrats don't want to hold a hearing because it will highlight opposition, including from Gov. Janet Mills and other Democratic lawmakers. Mills came out against a red flag bill proposed last session, but the bill was never brought forward for a floor vote after an hours-long public hearing that drew a divided crowd. "Under Maine law, all ballot initiatives MUST receive a public hearing before going to the Maine voters," SAM's alert states. "But Judiciary Chairs and Maine Gun Safety Coalition allies are blocking that hearing. Why? "Because Michael Bloomberg and the progressive gun-control lobby know it could END their campaign. This is because a massive bipartisan coalition of Mainers, including Governor Janet Mills, law enforcement, and lawmakers, will discuss the dangerous and potentially deadly realities of this extreme law." Aids more Mills did not respond to a question about whether Mills would personally testify before the committee, which would be a rare and dramatic moment, or if her administration would testify on her behalf, which usually occurs. This story will be updated. Copy the Story Link
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
House passes bill overhauling cannabis laws, Cannabis Control Commission
Advertisement Frustration with the slow pace of regulatory changes, headline-grabbing internal conflicts at the CCC, and a plea from the inspector general for the Legislature to intervene at the 'rudderless agency' combined last summer to get lawmakers thinking more seriously about a response. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up House Speaker Ronald Mariano recounted Wednesday how he went to Donahue last year to say 'we're going to have to fix this.' He said Treasurer Deborah Goldberg's removal of CCC chairwoman Shannon O'Brien had been dragged into court by that point, a long-running saga that has shined a light on internal strife at the CCC. That directive to Donahue led to a series of hearings and conversations that resulted in the bill before the House on Wednesday. 'He did the work. You could talk to him, and he could explain the process. It got us where we thought we had to take it away from the treasurer,' Mariano said before yielding to Donahue to give a more thorough explanation of the House's thinking around accountability at the CCC. Advertisement Today, the CCC is a five-commissioner independent body, with appointments made singularly and jointly by the governor, attorney general and treasurer, with the treasurer selecting the chair. Under the House-approved bill, the CCC would be consolidated entirely under the governor. The state's executive would appoint all three commissioners and select one of them to serve as chair (who would be the only full-time commissioner). The CCC would be 'subject to the laws applicable to agencies under the control of the governor.' Asked what makes the CCC's existing model unworkable, Mariano said it was a structural problem but gave a conflicted explanation. 'It was created by a ballot question that had no rhyme or reason to it ... there was no accountability,' he said. The speaker, who started his scrum with reporters by raising the subject of 'legislation by referendum' and the trend of advocates going around a slow-moving Legislature to make laws at the statewide ballot, added, 'We've been railing against government by referendum, and this is a perfect example why it doesn't work.' The CCC's existing structure is largely modeled on the Gaming Commission, where five full-time members with specific areas of expertise are appointed by the governor, treasurer and attorney general. But Mariano claimed Wednesday that 'the problem is they weren't written by the same people.' 'The gaming stuff was written by House people,' he said. 'The people in the marketplace wrote this bill, and they weren't interested in controlling it, in making sure there was accountability up and down the line. As a matter of fact, this was a rush to get into the market. Everyone thought they were going to get rich.' Advertisement The Mariano, who was majority leader at the time, was the lead House negotiator on the 2017 law that structured the CCC. The structure that was put in place 'This is legislation by referendum, and this is the problem, no one really focused on the writing of the ballot question on how this would be administered. And when it hit, the public had no idea what the problems were going to be and where they were going to be,' Mariano said Wednesday. Last summer, Inspector General Jeffrey Shapiro's office Advertisement Mariano was not available to clarify his comments Wednesday afternoon, but a spokesperson sent a statement saying his 'main point was that the Legislature was responding to a law that was passed by a referendum, which created a new industry outside of the typical legislative process, forcing the Legislature to address a number of unknowns.' 'In order to safely and effectively carry out the will of the voters, the Legislature has been forced to revise the original language multiple times. The legislation that the House is voting on today is better because of what we have learned since 2016, and establishes a new structure, different from the one that the ballot initiative spelled out,' Mariano spokesperson Ana Vivas said. The bill the House passed Wednesday also seeks to address intoxicating hemp-based products that largely fall into a gray area of the law and between the regulatory cracks by banning their sale without a license and setting up a new framework to regulate and tax them. Hemp beverages could only be sold by retailers licensed by the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission to sell all alcohol and all hemp-based products would need to be registered with the CCC. 'This ban and accompanying regulatory structure will help provide guidance and clarity on hemp products, removing those which are unregulated, of unknown origin or composition, and too easily accessible to minors,' Donahue said Wednesday. The House bill adjusts the existing cap on retail licenses any one operator can hold. The current limit is three, and the House bill would raise the cap on retail licenses to six over a three-year period (increasing first to four, a year later to five and finally to six). Opponents of that idea have slammed it as a 'gift to corporate cannabis and a death sentence for local and social equity businesses.' The existing three-license caps would remain in place for cultivation and manufacturing. Advertisement On the medical side of the legal marijuana world, the bill eliminates the requirement that medical marijuana businesses be 'vertically integrated,' meaning they must grow and process all the marijuana they sell. Patients and advocates have been calling for that change for years, saying the medical-only options have become scarce across Massachusetts since cannabis was legalized for non-medical use.
